Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
39 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:

 

No interest in responding to the content of my post?

 

I'm shocked.

Not when someone tells me to wake the ***** up.  GFY.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

That’s where confirmation bias comes into play though so I still think people will just follow who they agree with or those with complete opposite views they can try and dunk on.

 

I don’t really see twitter changing much except less people on the far right getting banned.

 

 

it would just be nice to see a platform adhere to a straight forward set of common sense rules and implement them evenly.

 

i hope this isnt about "allowing" a type of extremism, what your calling far right but instead ALSO removing the other side of extremism that has  become normalized simply by the platform and corp media ignoring.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Buffarukus said:

 

it would just be nice to see a platform adhere to a straight forward set of common sense rules and implement them evenly.

 

i hope this isnt about "allowing" a type of extremism, what your calling far right but instead ALSO removing the other side of extremism that has  become normalized simply by the platform and corp media ignoring.

 

That's where I hope Musk will make twitter's algorithm an open source so the rules are applied fairly to all users.  Maybe an amendment to section 230 to apply the same standard to all major social media platforms is needed.  

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

That's where I hope Musk will make twitter's algorithm an open source so the rules are applied fairly to all users.  Maybe an amendment to section 230 to apply the same standard to all major social media platforms is needed.  

 

ehh i been hearing section 230 alot and its pretty convienent to have that seriously brought up only now, trump did have his chance as well mind you but i think as for platform rules the free market will decide if elons changes are a success for most changes implemented. seeing as offering free speach will be "unique" for a established platform.

 

sorry but i don't want this administration touching something along the lines of what's "misinformation" in a law. im sure both sides would love to convien to bring society back to the days of 3 tv stations of certified gov approved info as controlling the narrative has spiraled out of their control...more so one side.

 

but i would support common sense changes like doxxing having harsh penalties and death threats and such. as of now these things seem to not even be taken seriously and people do them pretty freely without any regard to a punishment.

Edited by Buffarukus
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Buffarukus said:

 

ehh i been hearing section 230 alot and its pretty convienent to have that seriously brought up only now, trump did have his chance as well mind you but i think as for platform rules the free market will decide if elons changes are a success for most changes implemented.

 

sorry but i don't want this administration touching something along the lines of what's "misinformation" in a law. im sure both sides would love to convien to bring society back to the days of 3 tv stations of certified gov approved info as controlling the narrative has spiraled out of their control...more so one side.

 

but i would support common sense changes like doxxing having harsh penalties and death threats and such. as of now these things seem to not even be taken seriously and people do them pretty freely without any regard to a punishment.

Yeah.  Those would be common sense changes and I'm just suggesting more oversight into making the algorithms used public to ensure the rules are applied fairly.  That does mean some regulation as the free market didn't prevent Twitter from suspending the NY Post account right before the election and the NY Post couldn't do a darn thing about it.   I understand your concern with misinformation though and it would have to be a bipartisan effort to make amendments to section 230.  Good luck with that.

 

As an aside, I personally am not a big fan of twitter as far as politics go (love it for sports though) as it rewards tribalism and brings out the worst in people.  I don't see many nuanced conversations between people who disagree with each other on there.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Not when someone tells me to wake the ***** up.  GFY.

 

I apologize for that part. It wasn't meant for you personally but for the left in general.

 

I know you are one of the few honest posters here that leans left. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
10 hours ago, BillStime said:


 


 

giphy.gif?cid=5e2148867kyi3ihn1h6qdzpaih

 


cry harder hypocrite 

 

image.thumb.jpeg.9adf074b62bb70cc1135f4d468761357.jpeg

How do you know someone is a terrible person? They literally get upset when they can't tell a 5 year old who plays with their genitals.

  • Eyeroll 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
4 hours ago, DRsGhost said:

 

 

Free speech for the CULT, amirite?

 

The Party of Hypocrisy and COWARDS doesn't mind trampling all over "free speech" as they ban books, whitewash history and erase LGBTQ.

 

 

 

 

Posted

PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD:

 

ESPN Anchor Sues for Violation of Free Speech. 

 

“Sage Steele is the only openly conservative personality at ESPN, and she has never shied away from or compromised her beliefs. That’s made her a target for wokes at the subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company, and now she’s suing ESPN and Disney for violating her free speech rights.”

 

 

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/chris-queen/2022/04/28/espn-anchor-sues-for-violation-of-free-speech-n1593574

 

 

 

Background: Sage Steele Suspended from ESPN for ‘Controversial’ Comments about Mandates, Obama, Female Reporters.

 

https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2021/10/06/sage-steele-suspended-from-espn-for-controversial-comments-about-mandates-obama-female-reporters-n1522080

 

  • Agree 1
Posted

 

They didn’t place Biden’s Ministry of Truth under the Federal Trade Commission.

 

They placed it Under the Department of Homeland Security.

 

 

 

 

 

In charge of American's "speech"...........😡

 

 

.

Posted
1 minute ago, B-Man said:

 

They didn’t place Biden’s Ministry of Truth under the Federal Trade Commission.

 

They placed it Under the Department of Homeland Security.

 

 

 

 

 

In charge of American's "speech"...........😡

 

 

.

 

REEDUCATION CAMPS?

 

These idiots have ZERO foresight.  Who is re-writing history???????

Posted
2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

They didn’t place Biden’s Ministry of Truth under the Federal Trade Commission.

 

They placed it Under the Department of Homeland Security.

 

 

 

 

 

In charge of American's "speech"...........😡

 

 

.

 

May not want to use a Nazi sympathizing maniacal congresscritter to make your point, but you can lay in that bed if you'd like.

 

eek

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, 716er said:

 

May not want to use a Nazi sympathizing maniacal congresscritter to make your point, but you can lay in that bed if you'd like.

 

eek

 

 

 

 

Please Note:

 

Ignored the horrible re-post of the new Ministry CEO that clearly shows her biased mindset.

 

Instead he tries to divert by using the standard criticism of a minor league congresswoman, who's tweet came with the post.

 

 

Not a serious response.  (as usual)

 

 

 

  • Agree 3
×
×
  • Create New...